52. For cripes sake.

EVERY DAMN TIME someone posts something saying they wish some behavior would be altered, or they wish some people would stop doing some stupid thing, we always have to have the victimization patrol come storming along asking if they're in charge now, or who made them the boss of everyone else...

How do you not comprehend that posting an OPINION saying someone thinks things should be done a certain way is not the same thing as them thinking they're in charge of all of DU?

43. I took it as sarcasm.

7. thanks for revealing yourself

now I know to ignore your pre-judging close minded contempt of others' opinions .We don't need that kind of intolerance on DU. Oh, and by the way, don't worry you have LOTS of friends here, who merrily think banning free discussionand hating on controversial opinions is the way to run DU--so you won't miss me.

19. do you think the investigation of 9/11 was adequate?

I don't.

I read the chief counsel's opinion on the 9/11 commission report--he refused to endorse it due to credibility issues. And that is just the beginning of the problems with the official response to 9/11. I'm not crazy to want a new investigation. I am in the company of thousands of scientists architects and engineers who question the investigation.

Yet here and elsewhere I am labelled an epithet (strange--I want the truth, so I am just as nuts as a birther, who wants to spread lies.) I am grouped into an oppressed class which is labeled as nutty and sent to the dungeon. I don't think that is right on a forum called Underground, where I was led to believe controversy was welcomed and vigorously discussed. That;s how change happens.

But whatever. Lots of liberals nowadays are really into censorship of issues they are afraid of. They probably don't even think about it as an issue of principle. They just don't want to get tainted by "the crazies."There's a range of tolerance here, it's not 100% radical left, as our name would lead you to believe.

Thank goodness I can go discuss the subject with people who have actual expertise in the subject of buildings and fires.I guarantee you those respected and highly educated people at 9/11 Architects and Engineers for Truth don't believe they are crap. And they don't think Truth is a curse.

As for the Rove thing, well, we don't know. But I don't want to have to go looking in the
dungeon for discussion about the subject.

15. Thom Hartmann is backing away from this one now.

In an era of internet lulz and digital false flags, we must demand proof for these sort of claims made by Anonymous. ....

Thatís why itís vitally important for Anonymous to release any information or evidence it has about this plot to not just Julian Assange, but to law enforcement authorities as well. Otherwise, the alleged democracy-saving actions of the hacktivist group will instead be regarded as useless internet antics, relegated to the dustbins of history.

Albeit, he still seems to not understand that the whole Anon-to-Rove cheapie video was a fraud.

17. While I agree we need to focus on reality, I do think it's useful

to have discussions about voter fraud and election stealing.

We can't assume that everyone remembers what we remember, and keeping other (younger, primarily) people aware of the means by which elections in the past have either been stolen or else attempts have been made to do so - this is valuable education in, yes, reality - historical reality.

20. The election fraud promoted by the Fraudsters never occurred.

In 2000, Bush won primarily due to the efforts of Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush to purge the voter rolls, removing tens of thousands of legitimate African American voters.

In 2004 Ken Blackwell suppressed the Democratic vote by insuring urban Democratic precincts had nowhere near enough voting machines while more rural and suburban Republican precincts had plenty of voting machines. This resulted in voting being a quick and simple process for Republicans while a long, tedious process for Democrats which resulted in tens of thousands of Democrats simply giving up and not voting.

26. I think the distinction you and he seek to draw is pedantic for

an internet message board, and the free-wheeling spirit that is best-suited for healthy exchanges of productive ideas. "Election fraud" may not technically be what any of that was about, but it doesn't really matter. As long as people understand and see what happened, THAT is what I see as most valuable - something that helps voters defend against disenfranchisement.

18. Kos is an authoritarian hypocritical asshole- is he allowing discussion of Bengazi?

Kos is not a leader, he is a controller.

But he did inspire me....
Wasn't sure whether to believe the Anonymous/Rove story,until the reaction telling us to shut up @it

I can always tell that people are on to something, when a group of people are sent to convince everyone to shut up about it.

Now Kos thinks it's a conspiracy and not worth talking about?

That seals the deal.

Kos is an authoritarian and won't let anyone talk about 9/11 either.

But posters are allowed to discuss Benghazi and what did or did not happen, who was responsible, who didn't read the warnings.

Many limited hangout 'Democrats' (like Kos who was Republican/CIA?) are misleading the party.

If it weren't for 'Democracts" trying to hold the party back and misdirect, we would have solved the problems of our election systems by now.

He was of no use in prior incidents of election fraud, why would anyone value his opinion now?

Kos has to be an utter moron(or a set up) to believe our elections with secret software should not be questioned.

And the behavior of Rove, the obvious manufactured consent by the media about to cover up a stolen election...the media and GOP were behaving very strangely...but we should just not analyze that at all. yeah, their polls were just way off. Sure. Nothing to see here folks, you can trust 'Dem' blogger Kos.

The best 'argument' the people who tell us to shut up about it have.... If you point out that they might have tried to steal it, that takes away from Obama's win and the hard work. How fucking stupid is that? Anonymous was trying to prevent everyone's time and hard work from being wasted. Duh!!

38. No, anyone that buys the alleged Anon statement is the total moron.

Anyone that reads that and believes that ORCA, something that amounts to nothing more than an emailed pdf generated from a database of voter strike lists, has any connection whatsoever with state e-voting tabulation systems, needs to get off the internet and go learn how things actually work before ever getting back on it.

Kos is doing the right thing here. People pushing this alleged Anon statement are embarassments and they are too fucking ignorant to realize it. Anyone with a drop of IT knowledge can read that Anon (again I say alleged, because I don't believe real hackers wrote it, they would know better) statement and realize its bullshit immediately.

It has nothing to do with authoritarianism and everything to do with intellectual honesty and stopping the spread of embarassingly ignorant bullshit.

57. We have seen Rove in action and know what he is

capable of. It's a discussion board, you know, where people discuss things. And I really don't give a flying flip about your negative proof fallacy, if you say he didn't do it then where's your proof he didn't do it? You are demanding proof that he did or people should just STFU. So I say to you. Where is your proof he didn't?

" no need for discussion" My ass, this is a discussion forum. When Skinner says it's crazy talk, then and only then is it crazy talk.